Corticosteroid treatment for sepsis: a critical appraisal and meta-analysis of the literature

Advancing cell-based therapy in sepsis: An anesthesia outlook

ABSTRACT

Sepsis poses a health challenge globally owing to markedly high rates of morbidity and mortality. Despite employing bundle therapy over two decades, approaches including transient organ supportive therapy and clinical trials focusing on signaling pathways have failed in effectively reversing multiple organ failure in patients with sepsis. Prompt and appropriate perioperative management for surgical patients with concurrent sepsis is urgent. Consequently, innovative therapies focusing on remedying organ injuries are necessitated. Cell therapy has emerged as a promising therapeutic avenue for repairing local damage to vital organs and restoring homeostasis during perioperative treatment for sepsis. Given the pivotal role of immune cell responses in the pathogenesis of sepsis, stem cell-based interventions that primarily modulate immune responses by interacting with multiple immune cells have progressed into clinical trials. The strides made in single-cell sequencing and gene-editing technologies have advanced the understanding of disease-specific immune responses in sepsis. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-immune cell therapy offers an intriguing option for the treatment of sepsis. This review provides a concise overview of immune cell therapy, its current status, and the strides made in the context of sepsis research, discussing potential strategies for the management of patients with sepsis during perioperative stages.

Effect of dexamethasone dose on outcomes in acute COVID-19 disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The impact of different doses of dexamethasone on outcomes from acute COVID-19 pneumonia is unknown.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised control trials comparing different doses of dexamethasone in adult patients with COVID-19. High dose dexamethasone treatment was defined as 12-24 mg daily, whereas low-dose treatment was 6-8 mg daily. Primary outcome was 28-day mortality.

RESULTS

Eight trials including 3469 patients were identified, with 1775 patients receiving high dose dexamethasone. There was no difference in mortality between patients receiving high dose or low-dose dexamethasone (22.0% vs. 20.2%; odds ratio 1.20 [95% confidence interval 0.86-1.67]; p = 0.29; I2 = 63%; TSA-adjusted CI [0.31-4.66]; very low QoE). Meta-regression did not demonstrate a dose-dependent effect of steroids on mortality. High dose dexamethasone was associated with an increased risk of hyperglycaemia (23.6% vs. 17.2%; 1.51 [1.19-1.92]; p = 0.0008; I2 = 0%; TSA-adjusted CI [0.90-2.54]; low QoE) but not secondary infections (14.3% vs. 15.0%; 0.87 [0.56-1.37]; p = 0.56; I2 = 72%; very low QoE). Risk of bias was low for seven of the eight studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The mortality of patients with acute COVID-19 receiving high-dose dexamethasone is similar to patients receiving low-dose dexamethasone, although high-dose dexamethasone is associated with an increased risk of hyperglycaemia.

Sepsis and Adrenal Insufficiency

In sepsis, dysregulation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, alterations in cortisol metabolism, and tissue resistance to glucocorticoids can all result in relative adrenal insufficiency or critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI). The symptoms and signs of CIRCI during sepsis are nonspecific, generally including decreased mental status, unexplained fever, or hypotension refractory to fluids, and the requirement of vasopressor therapy to maintain adequate blood pressure. While we have been aware of this syndrome for over a decade, it remains a poorly understood condition, challenging to diagnose, and associated with significantly diverging practices among clinicians, particularly regarding the optimal dosing and duration of corticosteroid therapy. The existing literature on corticosteroid use in patients with sepsis and septic shock is vast with dozens of randomized controlled trials conducted across the past 4 decades. These studies have universally demonstrated reduced duration of shock, though the effects of corticosteroids on mortality have been inconsistent, and their use has been associated with adverse effects including hyperglycemia, neuromuscular weakness, and an increased risk of infection. In this article, we aim to provide a thorough, evidence-based, and practical review of the current recommendations for the diagnosis and management of patients with sepsis who develop CIRCI, explore the controversies surrounding this topic, and highlight what lies on the horizon as new evidence continues to shape our practice.

Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: What Have We Learned in the Last Two Decades?

Sepsis is a clinical syndrome encompassing physiologic and biological abnormalities caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. Sepsis progression into septic shock is associated with a dramatic increase in mortality, hence the importance of early identification and treatment. Over the last two decades, the definition of sepsis has evolved to improve early sepsis recognition and screening, standardize the terms used to describe sepsis and highlight its association with organ dysfunction and higher mortality. The early 2000s witnessed the birth of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT), which showed a dramatic reduction in mortality leading to its wide adoption, and the surviving sepsis campaign (SSC), which has been instrumental in developing and updating sepsis guidelines over the last 20 years. Outside of early fluid resuscitation and antibiotic therapy, sepsis management has transitioned to a less aggressive approach over the last few years, shying away from routine mixed venous oxygen saturation and central venous pressure monitoring and excessive fluids resuscitation, inotropes use, and red blood cell transfusions. Peripheral vasopressor use was deemed safe and is rising, and resuscitation with balanced crystalloids and a restrictive fluid strategy was explored. This review will address some of sepsis management's most important yet controversial components and summarize the available evidence from the last two decades.

Effect of Corticosteroids on Mortality and Clinical Cure in Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Meta-regression of Randomized Control Trials

BACKGROUND

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Corticosteroids may be a beneficial adjunct in the treatment of bacterial pneumonia.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Is there any benefit of corticosteroid therapy in the management of bacterial CAP among patients requiring hospitalization?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched to identify randomized controlled trials assessing the use of systemic corticosteroids compared with standard care in the management of CAP. A systematic review, meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) were performed. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, treatment failure, readmission, and adverse events. Data are presented as risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI, P value, heterogeneity (I2), and TSA-adjusted CIs.

RESULTS

Sixteen trials met the eligibility criteria. All-cause mortality (16 studies [3,842 patients]; RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.67-1.07]; P = .17; I2 = 14%; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.61-1.09), ICU admission (six studies [2,619 patients]; RR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.45-0.97]; P = .04; I2 = 0%; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.37-1.12), treatment failure (six studies [2,093 patients]; RR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.37-1.67]; P = .52; I2 = 68%; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.02-25.5), and the incidence of adverse events (six studies [2,487 patients]; RR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.97-1.25]; P = .14; I2 = 53%; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.82-2.41) were similar between patients receiving corticosteroids and patients assigned to the control group. The need for mechanical ventilation (eight studies [1,457 patients]; RR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.33-0.77]; P = .001; I2 = 0%; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.20-0.85) was lower among patients receiving corticosteroids compared with those receiving standard care. However, corticosteroid use may be associated with higher rates of hospital readmission (five studies [2,853 patients]; RR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.05-1.38]; P = .008; I2 = 0%; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.89-1.98).

INTERPRETATION

Corticosteroid therapy is associated with a lower incidence of progression to requiring mechanical ventilation among patients hospitalized with CAP. No association was found between corticosteroid therapy and mortality, treatment failure, or adverse events.

TRIAL REGISTRY

PROSPERO; No.: CRD42021279359; URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.

Chemical mimetics of the N-degron pathway alleviate systemic inflammation by activating mitophagy and immunometabolic remodeling

The Arg/N-degron pathway, which is involved in the degradation of proteins bearing an N-terminal signal peptide, is connected to p62/SQSTM1-mediated autophagy. However, the impact of the molecular link between the N-degron and autophagy pathways is largely unknown in the context of systemic inflammation. Here, we show that chemical mimetics of the N-degron Nt-Arg pathway (p62 ligands) decreased mortality in sepsis and inhibited pathological inflammation by activating mitophagy and immunometabolic remodeling. The p62 ligands alleviated systemic inflammation in a mouse model of lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced septic shock and in the cecal ligation and puncture model of sepsis. In macrophages, the p62 ligand attenuated the production of proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines in response to various innate immune stimuli. Mechanistically, the p62 ligand augmented LPS-induced mitophagy and inhibited the production of mitochondrial reactive oxygen species in macrophages. The p62 ligand-mediated anti-inflammatory, antioxidative, and mitophagy-activating effects depended on p62. In parallel, the p62 ligand significantly downregulated the LPS-induced upregulation of aerobic glycolysis and lactate production. Together, our findings demonstrate that p62 ligands play a critical role in the regulation of inflammatory responses by orchestrating mitophagy and immunometabolic remodeling.

Review article: Early steroid administration for traumatic haemorrhagic shock: A systematic review

Haemorrhagic shock after trauma is a leading cause of death worldwide, particularly in young individuals. Despite advances in trauma systems and resuscitation strategies, mortality from haemorrhagic shock has not declined over the previous two decades. A proportion of shocked trauma patients may experience a deficiency of cortisol relative to the severity of their injury. The benefit of exogenous steroid administration in patients suffering haemorrhagic shock as a result of injury is unclear. A systematic review of four databases (Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Cochrane, Scopus) was undertaken. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were pre-determined and two reviewers independently screened the articles with disagreements arbitrated by a third reviewer. The primary outcome variable was 28-day mortality. Quality of studies were assessed using the Cochrane-risk-of-bias (RoB 2) tool. Of the 2919 studies yielded by the search strategy, 1274 duplicates were removed and 1645 screened on title and abstract. After the full text of 33 studies were assessed, two articles were included. Both studies were over 30 years old with small numbers of participants and with primary outcomes not including mortality. Of the data available, no statistically significant difference in mortality was detected. Hospital length of stay, reversal of shock or adverse events were not reported. Both studies were at risk of bias. There are no high quality or recent studies in the English literature investigating the use of steroids for haemorrhagic shocked trauma patients. PROSPERO: CRD42021239656.

Medication and Fluid Management of Pediatric Sepsis and Septic Shock

Sepsis is a life-threatening response to infection that contributes significantly to neonatal and pediatric morbidity and mortality worldwide. The key tenets of care include early recognition of potential sepsis, rapid intervention with appropriate fluids to restore adequate tissue perfusion, and empiric antibiotics to cover likely pathogens. Vasoactive/inotropic agents are recommended if tissue perfusion and hemodynamics are inadequate following initial fluid resuscitation. Several adjunctive therapies have been suggested with theoretical benefit, though definitive recommendations are not yet supported by research reports. This review focuses on the recommendations for medication and fluid management of pediatric sepsis and septic shock, highlighting issues related to antibiotic choices and antimicrobial stewardship, selection of intravenous fluids for resuscitation, and selection and use of vasoactive/inotropic medications. Controversy remains regarding resuscitation fluid volume and type, antibiotic choices depending upon infectious risks in the patient's community, and adjunctive therapies such as vitamin C, corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulin, and methylene blue. We include best practice recommendations based on international guidelines, a review of primary literature, and a discussion of ongoing clinical trials and the nuances of therapeutic choices.

Efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in acute respiratory distress syndrome: An overview of meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based recommendations on the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remain a therapeutic challenge. Findings from several systematic reviews and meta-analyses are inconsistent. We aimed to assess the published meta-analyses through a systematic review approach and provide further insight into the current uncertainty and also to perform an updated meta-analysis from all the available primary studies.

METHODOLOGY

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review (PRISMA) guidelines to establish the patients, intervention, control and outcome (PICO) for reviewing published meta-analyses. Data sources such as PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Cochrane and Google Scholar from inception to February 2021 were accessed. Prevention of ARDS, mortality, ventilator-free days, ICU stay and safety in terms of occurrence of adverse effects were the patient-related outcomes. The review also assessed meta-analysis design-related outcomes which includes the quality of meta-analysis, factors contributing to the risk of bias, extent and sources of heterogeneity, publication bias and robustness of findings. AMSTAR-2 checklist assessed the quality of published meta-analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 18 meta-analyses were reviewed comprising a total of 38 primary studies and 3760 patients. Fourteen studies were in ARDS, three in community-acquired pneumonia and one in critical care. The overall quality of meta-analyses was observed to be critically low to high. A non-significant risk of publication bias and non-significant level of heterogeneity was observed in the reviewed meta-analysis. Corticosteroid was significantly effective in preventing ARDS among CAP patients. The effect of corticosteroids on mortality was observed to be still inconsistent, whereas significant improvement was observed with ICU and ventilator outcomes compared with the control group. Our meta-analysis observed a significant reduction of mortality in RCTs (RR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.61 to 0.99) and the duration of mechanical ventilation (MD: -4.75; 95% CI: -7.63 to -1.88); and a significant increase in ventilator-free days (MD: 6.03; 95% CI: 3.59 to 8.47) and ICU-free days (MD: 8.04; 95% CI: 2.70 to 13.38) in ARDS patients treated with corticosteroids compared with the control group.

CONCLUSION

The quality of included studies ranged from critically low to high demonstrating inconsistency in risk of bias. While older studies found no significant effect, recent meta-analyses of RCTs found a significant mortality reduction in the corticosteroid group with considerable levels of heterogeneity. The updated meta-analysis by our team found a significant reduction in mortality in the pooled estimation of RCTs but not in cohort studies. Corticosteroid therapy was effective in terms of ICU and ventilator outcomes with minimal safety concerns. Future meta-analyses should be well executed with specific research questions and well performed with minimal risk of bias to produce good quality evidence.

Potential role of herbal medicines as a novel approach in sepsis treatment

The growing number of deaths related to sepsis has become a major concern for past few years. Sepsis is a complex pathological reactions that is explained by series of host response to microbial insult. The resulted systemic reactions are manifested by early appearance of proinflammatory cytokines leading to hyperinflammatory phase which is followed by septic shock and death of the patient. The present study has revealed that antibiotics are not self-sufficient to control the complex mechanism of sepsis. Moreover prolonged and unnecessary administration of antibiotics may lead to antibiotic resistance to pathogens. In addition to this, immunosuppressive medications are selective and have targeted approach to certain study population. Drugs from herbal origin have shown to possess a mammoth of immunomodulatory potential by suppressing proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines exhibiting no or minimal unwanted secondary responses. Concomitantly, herbal plants tend to modulate oxidative stress level and haematological imbalance during inflammatory diseased conditions. Natural compounds have gained much attention for the treatment of several clinical complications. Considering the promising responses of medicinal plants with less/no side effects and easy procurement, comprehensive research on herbal plants to treat sepsis should be contemplated.

What Is the Role of Steroids for Septic Shock in 2021?

Corticosteroids have been used for decades in the adjunctive treatment of severe infections in intensive care. The most frequent scenario in intensive care is in septic shock, where low doses of glucocorticoids appear to restore vascular responsiveness to norepinephrine. There is a strong body of evidence suggesting that hydrocortisone reduces time on vasopressor, and may modulate the immune response. In this review, we explore the current evidence supporting the use of corticosteroids in septic shock, its benefits, and potential harms. In addition to landmark clinical trials, we will also describe new frontiers for the use of corticosteroids in septic shock which should be explored in future studies.

Severely ill pediatric patients with Shiga toxin-associated hemolytic uremic syndrome (STEC-HUS) who suffered from multiple organ involvement in the early stage

BACKGROUND

Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli-associated hemolytic uremic syndrome (STEC-HUS) is the main cause of pediatric acute kidney injury (AKI) in Argentina. Endothelial injury is the trigger event in the microangiopathic process. The host inflammatory response to toxin and E. coli lipopolysaccharide (LPS) is involved in disease pathophysiology.

METHODS

This retrospective study describes pediatric STEC-HUS patients with multiorgan involvement at the initial phase of disease. A retrospective study of critically ill HUS patients with evidence of E. coli infection was conducted through a period of 15 years.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients 35.4 ± 4.1 months were admitted to the intensive care unit for 21 ± 2 days. Mechanical ventilation was required in 41 patients, early inotropic support in 37, and 28 developed septic shock. Forty-one patients required kidney replacement therapy for 12 ± 1 days. Forty-one patients showed neurological dysfunction. Dilated cardiomyopathy was demonstrated in 3 patients, left ventricular systolic dysfunction in 4, and hypertension in 17. Four patients had pulmonary hemorrhage, and acute respiratory distress syndrome in 2. Colectomy for transmural colonic necrosis was performed in 3 patients. Thirty-seven patients were treated with therapeutic plasma exchange, and 28 patients received methylprednisolone (10 mg/kg for 3 days). Of the surviving 32 patients, neurological sequelae were seen in 11 and chronic kidney failure in 5.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe clinical outcome at onset suggests an amplified inflammatory response after exposure to Shiga toxin and/or E. coli LPS. STEC-HUS associated with severe neurological involvement, hemodynamic instability, and AKI requires intensive care and focused therapy.

Adverse Outcomes Associated With Corticosteroid Use in Critical COVID-19: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study

Corticosteroid is commonly used to reduce damage from inflammatory reactions in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aim to determine the outcomes of corticosteroid use in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Ninety six critically ill patients, hospitalized in 14 hospitals outside Wuhan from January 16 to March 30, 2020 were enrolled in this study. Among 96 critical patients, 68 were treated with corticosteroid (CS group), while 28 were not treated with corticosteroids (non-CS group). Multivariable logistic regression were performed to determine the possible correlation between corticosteroid use and the treatment outcomes. Forty-six (68%) patients in the CS group died compared to six (21%) of the non-CS group. Corticosteroid use was also associated with the development of ARDS, exacerbation of pulmonary fibrosis, longer hospital stay and virus clearance time. On admission, no difference in laboratory findings between the CS and the non-CS group was observed. After corticosteroid treatment, patients treated with corticosteroids were associated with higher counts of white blood cells, neutrophils, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, alanine aminotransferase level and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. In conclusion, corticosteroid use in critically ill COVID-19 patients was associated with a much higher case fatality rate. Frequent incidence of liver injury and multi-organ failure in corticosteroid treated patients may have contributed to the adverse outcomes. The multi-organ failure is likely caused by more persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection and higher viral load, due to the inhibition of immune surveillance by corticosteroid.

Effectiveness of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis or septic shock using the new third international consensus definitions (Sepsis-3): A retrospective observational study

Background

The effects of intravenous corticosteroids in patients with sepsis remain controversial due to mixed results from randomized trials. Moreover, updated definitions of sepsis, Sepsis-3, were proposed in 2016, and findings related to the effects of corticosteroids in patients defined by the Sepsis-3 criteria are scarce.

Objective

To investigate the effectiveness of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis or septic shock using real-world data to complement the findings of randomized controlled trials, and to determine whether the treatment effects differ by sepsis definitions.

Methods

We conducted this study by utilizing a large, multi-center healthcare database, eICU, in which we identified patients with sepsis admitted to 208 intensive care units across the US from 2014 to 2015 based on two different definitions: prior explicit definitions (i.e., based on diagnosis codes) and the Sepsis-3 definitions (i.e., based on SOFA score). The association between intravenous corticosteroids and in-hospital survival up to 50 days in patients with sepsis was retrospectively analyzed. A parametric hazard model with stabilized inverse probability of treatment weight adjustment was used to control for baseline confounders.

Results

Of the 7,158 patients identified based on the explicit definition, 562 (7.9%) received corticosteroids; of the 5,009 patients identified based on the Sepsis-3 definition, 465 (9.3%) received corticosteroids. In the explicit cohort, adjusted in-hospital survival at day 50 was 0.62 in the treated vs 0.57 in the non-treated, with a survival difference of 0.05 (95%CI: -0.11, 0.17). Similar results were seen in the Sepsis-3 cohort (0.58 vs 0.56 in treated and non-treated, respectively), with a 50-day survival difference of 0.02 (95%CI: -0.19, 0.17).

Conclusions

In patients with sepsis or septic shock, intravenous corticosteroids were not associated with a higher in-hospital survival up to 50 days regardless of the sepsis definitions. Further research may be necessary to definitively confirm effectiveness in real-world practice.

LncRNA LUADT1 sponges miR-195 to prevent cardiac endothelial cell apoptosis in sepsis

Background

The oncogenic role of the newly identified lncRNA LUADT1 has been revealed in lung adenocarcinoma. It was reported that LUADT1 plays a critical role in multiple human diseases. This study was carried out to investigate the role of LUADT1 in sepsis.

Methods

Sixty patients with sepsis and sixty healthy volunteers were recruited for this study. Plasma samples were collected from all participants. Human primary coronary artery endothelial cells were also used in this study. The expression of Pim-1, miR-195 and LUADT1 were detected by RT-qPCR. The interaction between miR-195 and LUADT1 was determined by overexpression experiments and luciferase activity assay. Cell apoptosis was detected by flow cytometry. The expression of apoptosis-related protein was detected by Western blotting.

Results

Bioinformatics analysis revealed the potential interaction between LUADT1 and miR-195, which was confirmed by dual luciferase reporter assay. LUADT1 was downregulated in patients with sepsis. Moreover, LPS treatment downregulated the expression of LUADT1 in primary cardiac endothelial cells. Overexpression of LUADT1 and miR-195 did not affect the expression of each other in primary cardiac endothelial cells. Interestingly, overexpression of LUADT1 was found to upregulate the expression of Pim-1, a target of miR-195. In addition, it was found that overexpression of LUADT1 and Pim-1 reduced the enhancement effects of miR-195 on LPS-induced cardiac endothelial cell apoptosis.

Conclusion

In summary, LUADT1 may protect cardiac endothelial cells against apoptosis in sepsis by regulating the miR-195/Pim-1 axis.

The severe COVID-19: A sepsis induced by viral infection? And its immunomodulatory therapy

COVID-19 is known for its magical infectivity, fast transmission and high death toll based on the large number of infected people. From the perspective of the clinical manifestation, autopsy examination and pathophysiology, the essence of COVID-19 should be viewed as a sepsis induced by viral infection, and has the essential characteristics as sepsis induced by other pathogens. Therefore, in addition to etiological and supportive treatment, immunomodulatory therapy is also appropriate to severe COVID-19. Although there is still a lack of consensus on immunotherapy for sepsis so far, relatively rich experiences have been accumulated in the past decades, which will help us in the treatment of severe COVID-19. This article will elaborate immunotherapy of sepsis, though it may not be consistent.

Baricitinib: A Review of Pharmacology, Safety, and Emerging Clinical Experience in COVID-19

A hyperinflammatory response to severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, reminiscent of cytokine release syndrome, has been implicated in the pathophysiology of acute respiratory distress syndrome and organ damage in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Agents that inhibit components of the pro-inflammatory cascade have garnered interest as potential treatment options with hopes that dampening the proinflammatory process may improve clinical outcomes. Baricitinib is a reversible Janus-associated kinase (JAK)-inhibitor that interrupts the signaling of multiple cytokines implicated in COVID-19 immunopathology. It may also have antiviral effects by targeting host factors that viruses rely for cell entry and by suppressing type I interferon driven angiotensin-converting-enzyme-2 upregulation. However, baricitinib's immunosuppressive effects may be detrimental during acute viral infections by delaying viral clearance and increasing vulnerability to secondary opportunistic infections. The lack of reliable biomarkers to monitor patients' immune status as illness evolves complicates deployment of immunosuppressive drugs like baricitinib. Furthermore, baricitinib carries the risk of increased thromboembolic events, which is concerning given the proclivity towards a hypercoagulable state in patients with COVID-19. In this article, we review available data on baricitinib with an emphasis on immunosuppressive and antiviral pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, safety, and current progress in COVID-19 clinical trials.

Glucocorticoid metabolism in critically ill dogs (Canis lupus familiaris)

Critical illness due to sepsis is a major global health concern associated with a high burden of mortality and cost. Glucocorticoid dysregulation in human sepsis is associated with poorer outcomes. This study examines glucocorticoid metabolism in septic canine patients to delineate elements of cellular dysregulation in common with critically ill humans and explore potential differences. This was a prospective case-control study conducted in the veterinary specialist critical care departments of two University teaching hospitals. Critically ill canine patients with naturally occurring sepsis or septic shock were compared with an in-hospital control population. Serum total, bound, and free cortisol concentrations were increased in septic shock (P < 0.001), and higher bound cortisol was associated with nonsurvival (P = 0.026). Urinary Gas Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry was performed to assess urinary glucocorticoid metabolites and estimate intracellular glucocorticoid metabolism. Decreased renal 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 2 (11βHSD2) activity inferred from increased urinary cortisol-to-cortisone ratio was observed in critically ill dogs (P < 0.001). Decreased 11βHSD2 activity (P = 0.019) and increased A-ring reduction of cortisone (P = 0.001) were associated with nonsurvival within the critically ill dogs. Intriguingly, two dogs were identified with low circulating total cortisol (<2 mg/dL) associated with increased A-ring reduction of cortisol, not previously described. Investigation of spontaneous canine sepsis and septic shock reveals dysregulation of cortisol to cortisone conversion similar to that observed in human patients, but with differences in A-ring reduction compared with those reported in humans. In addition, two dogs with high levels of cortisol inactivation associated with low circulating cortisol concentrations were identified.

Quality assessment of meta-analyses evaluating randomized clinical trials to improve the prognosis of septic shock: an overview of systematic reviews

Objective: Clinical guidelines for the treatment of septic shock are based on the studies with the best scientific evidence, which are meta-analyses of clinical trials. However, these meta-analyses may have methodological limitations that prevent their conclusions from being extrapolated to routine clinical practice. Therefore, the objective of this study is to determine the quality of these meta-analyses through a systematic review.Methods: In this systematic review, we searched MEDLINE, Scopus and EMBASE from inception to May 2019. We selected meta-analyses from clinical trials that determined the effectiveness of an intervention in reducing the incidence of mortality in patients with septic shock. All items were extracted from the Overview Quality Assessment Questionnaire (OQAQ), which collects information from both systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Results: A total of 34 studies were included. Most elements of the OQAQ were conducted satisfactorily, although 35.3% of meta-analyses did not use a quality assessment of the studies included in other analyses. In 52.9% of meta-analyses, the quality of the studies was high or very high.Conclusions: The methods used to obtain the results should be taken into account when recommending an intervention to treat septic shock if the evidence comes from a meta-analysis of the analyzed characteristics.

Corticosteroids for Septic Shock: Another Chapter in the Saga

The use of corticosteroids in the management of septic shock has been a highly debated topic for quite some time. Corticosteroids have the ability to combat hyperinflammatory and exaggerated vasodilatory responses, as well as to sensitize adrenergic receptors to decrease the duration of shock. While helpful clinically, this has not translated to consistent mortality benefits. Conflicting results from 2 landmark trials published in 2002 and 2008 have led to varying clinical practices, and a clearly defined role of corticosteroids in septic shock is lacking. A decade later, an influx of new data derived from 2 more large trials continues to echo diverging viewpoints regarding patient mortality. In combination with fluctuating study designs (eg, adjunctive therapies and shock management) and patient populations (eg, illness severity), generalized conclusions are still difficult to draw. Despite these challenges, this review critically analyzes recently published data in the context of historical debate to provide an updated comment on the role of corticosteroids in septic shock. In summary, hydrocortisone therapy is likely to demonstrate maximal benefit when initiated on patients with septic shock and organ failure refractory to vasopressor therapy and should be used judiciously in other settings as it comes without a demonstrated benefit in mortality and increased potential for adverse effects.

Effects and safety of separate low-dose hydrocortisone use in patients with septic shock: A meta-analysis

Objective:

The aim of this study was to explore the effects and safety of low-dose hydrocortisone in patients with septic shock.

Methods:

The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from database inception until 1 August 2018. Two reviewers performed literature selection, data extraction, and quality evaluation independently.

Results:

Twelve randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis. The combined results showed that low-dose hydrocortisone use had no survival benefit in patients with septic shock (relative risk = 1.09; 95% confidence interval = 0.88–1.05; P = 0.37). But low-dose hydrocortisone use was useful for shock reverse (relative risk = 1.09; 95% confidence interval = 1.00–1.19; P = 0.04) and in shortening the time of vasopressor support (weighted mean difference = −1.79, 95% confidence interval = −2.05 to −1.52; P < 0.00001). In addition, use of low-dose hydrocortisone was associated with a higher risk of hyperglycemia (relative risk = 1.21; 95% confidence interval = 1.04–1.40; P = 0.01) and hypernatremia (relative risk = 6.34; 95% confidence interval = 1.19–33.81; P = 0.03). There was no significant improvement of intensive care unit mortality (relative risk = 1.11; 95% confidence interval = 0.93–1.33; P = 0.23) or hospital mortality (relative risk = 1.08; 95% confidence interval = 0.94–1.24; P = 0.29), length of intensive care unit (weighted mean difference = −1.84; 95% confidence interval = −5.80 to 2.11; P = 0.36) or length of hospital (weighted mean difference = 0.11; 95% confidence interval = −2.06 to 2.29; P = 0.98), and time of mechanical support (weighted mean difference = −0.69; 95% confidence interval = −1.76 to −0.38; P = 0.20) with the use of low-dose hydrocortisone. There was no significant difference in secondary infection (relative risk = 1.04; 95% confidence interval = 0.91–1.18; P = 0.57), recurrence of shock (relative risk = 1.47; 95% confidence interval = 0.64–3.39; P = 0.36), and gastrointestinal bleeding (relative risk = 1.41; 95% confidence interval = 0.89–2.22; P = 0.14) with the use of low-dose hydrocortisone.

Conclusion:

Although there was no effect of low-dose hydrocortisone on survival of patients with septic shock, it is associated with a higher rate of shock reversal and shortening duration of vasopressor support; thus, low-dose hydrocortisone may be an alternative drug in septic shock patients who are refractory to fluid resuscitation and vasopressors.

Beta-Blocker Therapy Preserves Normal Splenic T-Lymphocyte Numbers Reduced in Proportion to Sepsis Severity in a Sepsis Model

Lymphocyte cell death contributes to sepsis-induced immunosuppression, leading to poor prognosis. This study examined whether sepsis severity and beta-blocker therapy could affect the degree of T-lymphocyte cell death in a mouse model of sepsis. In the first control study, 20 animals were allocated to 4 groups: control group with sham operation (group C, n = 5) and 3 groups with cecum ligation and puncture (CLP) performed at 3 different sites: proximal, middle, and distal cecum (groups CLP-P, CLP-M, and CLP-D, respectively; n = 5 in each group). Their spleens were resected under general anesthesia 24 hours after CLP, and the total number of normal splenic T lymphocytes per mouse and the percentage of apoptotic T lymphocytes were evaluated using flow cytometry. In the second experimental study, the effect of the beta-blocker esmolol was examined in CLP-P (group CLP-PE vs. CLP-P; n = 5 in each group). The total normal splenic T-lymphocyte numbers per mouse significantly decreased in proportion to CLP severity (group C, 18.6 × 10⁶ (15 × 10⁶–23.6 × 10⁶); CLP-D, 9.2 × 10⁶ (8.8 × 10⁶–9.8 × 10⁶); CLP-M, 6.7 × 10⁶ (6.3 × 10⁶–7.0 × 10⁶); and CLP-P, 5.3 × 10⁶ (5.1 × 10⁶–6.8 × 10⁶)). Beta-blocker therapy restored T-lymphocyte numbers (group CLP-PE vs. CLP-P; 6.94 ± 1.52 × 10⁶ vs. 4.18 ± 1.71 × 10⁶; p=0.027) without affecting apoptosis percentage. Beta-blocker therapy might improve sepsis-induced immunosuppression via normal splenic T-lymphocyte preservation.

Corticosteroids for treating sepsis in children and adults

BACKGROUND

Sepsis occurs when an infection is complicated by organ failure. Sepsis may be complicated by impaired corticosteroid metabolism. Thus, providing corticosteroids may benefit patients. The original review was published in 2004 and was updated in 2010 and 2015 prior to this update.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of corticosteroids on death in children and adults with sepsis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN, and the WHO Clinical Trials Search Portal, on 25 July 2019. In addition, we conducted reference checking and citation searching, and contacted study authors, to identify additional studies as needed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of corticosteroids versus placebo or usual care (antimicrobials, fluid replacement, and vasopressor therapy as needed) in children and adults with sepsis. We also included RCTs of continuous infusion versus intermittent bolus of corticosteroids.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All review authors screened and selected studies for inclusion. One review author extracted data, which was checked by the others, and by the lead author of the primary study when possible. We obtained unpublished data from the authors of some trials. We assessed the methodological quality of trials and applied GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. Review authors did not contribute to assessment of eligibility and risk of bias, nor to data extraction, for trials they had participated in.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 61 trials (12,192 participants), of which six included only children, two included children and adults, and the remaining trials included only adults. Nine studies are ongoing and will be considered in future versions of this review. We judged 19 trials as being at low risk of bias. Corticosteroids versus placebo or usual care Compared to placebo or usual care, corticosteroids probably slightly reduce 28-day mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 0.99; 11,233 participants; 50 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Corticosteroids may result in little to no difference in long-term mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03; 6236 participants; 7 studies; low-certainty evidence) and probably slightly reduce hospital mortality (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.99; 8183 participants; 26 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). Corticosteroids reduced length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay for all participants (mean difference (MD) -1.07 days, 95% CI -1.95 to -0.19; 7612 participants; 21 studies; high-certainty evidence) and resulted in a large reduction in length of hospital stay for all participants (MD -1.63 days, 95% CI -2.93 to -0.33; 8795 participants; 22 studies; high-certainty evidence). Corticosteroids increase the risk of muscle weakness (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.44; 6145 participants; 6 studies; high-certainty evidence). Corticosteroids probably do not increase the risk of superinfection (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.19; 5356 participants; 25 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Corticosteroids increase the risk of hypernatraemia (high-certainty evidence) and probably increase the risk of hyperglycaemia (moderate-certainty evidence). Moderate-certainty evidence shows that there is probably little or no difference in gastroduodenal bleeding, stroke, or cardiac events, and low-certainty evidence suggests that corticosteroids may result in little to no difference in neuropsychiatric events. Continuous infusion of corticosteroids versus intermittent bolus We are uncertain about the effects of continuous infusion of corticosteroids compared with intermittent bolus administration. Three studies reported data for this comparison, and the certainty of evidence for all outcomes was very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-certainty evidence indicates that corticosteroids probably reduce 28-day and hospital mortality among patients with sepsis. Corticosteroids result in large reductions in ICU and hospital length of stay (high-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in the risk of major complications; however, corticosteroids increase the risk of muscle weakness and hypernatraemia, and probably increase the risk of hyperglycaemia. The effects of continuous versus intermittent bolus administration of corticosteroids are uncertain.

Impact and Beneficial Critical Points of Clinical Outcome in Corticosteroid Management of Adult Patients With Sepsis: Meta-Analysis and GRADE Assessment

Background: With new randomised pieces of evidence and the latest clinical practice guideline from the BMJ emerging in 2018, an updated analysis of best available evidence on the controversial effects of corticosteroids in sepsis is warranted. Objectives: To comprehensively evaluate whether corticosteroids are beneficial in reducing mortality and what cumulative dosage, daily dosage, and duration of corticosteroid treatment would enable adult patients with sepsis to reach the critical point of benefits. Methods: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMbase, Cochrane Library, and LILACS database were searched until March 22, 2019. Results: Thirty RCTs with 8,836 participants were identified. Long course low-dose corticosteroid therapy could improve 28-day mortality (RR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.84-0.97; high quality), intensive care unit mortality (RR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.79-0.95; moderate quality), and in-hospital mortality (RR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.79-0.997; high quality). However, we found no benefits for 90-day, 180-day, and 1-year mortality. Subgroup results of long course corticosteroid treatment in a population with septic shock and vasopressor-dependent septic shock, corticosteroid regimen with hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone, corticosteroid dosing strategies including bolus dosing and infusion dosing, the strategies of abrupt discontinuation, timing of randomisation ≤24 h, impact factor of ≥10, and sample size ≥500 were associated with a marginally reduction in 28-day mortality. Conclusions: This meta-analysis found that the long course low-dose and not short course high-dose corticosteroid treatment could marginally improve short-term 28-day mortality with high quality, especially septic shock and vasopressor-dependent septic shock, and it is recommended that long course (about 7 days) low-dose (about 200-300mg per day) hydrocortisone (or equivalent) with cumulative dose (at least about 1,000mg) may be a viable management option for overall patients with sepsis, and it can be also adapted to patient with septic shock alone. Early hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone administration, via continuous infusion or bolus dosing, is also particularly important for the prognosis. Abrupt discontinuation of corticosteroids, as opposed to the conventional tapered discontinuation, may be considered as a desirable option in 28-day mortality. The safety profile of long course low-dose corticosteroid treatment, including adverse hyperglycaemia and hypernatraemia events, remains a concern, although these events could be easily treated. Clinical Trial Registration: PROSPERO, identifier CRD 42018092849.

Hydrocortisone Reduces 28-day Mortality in Septic Patients: A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis

The goal of this study was to determine the utility of hydrocortisone in septic shock and its effect on mortality. We performed a systematic search from inception until March 01, 2018, according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines comparing hydrocortisone to placebo in septic shock patients and selected studies according to our pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Four reviewers extracted data into the predefined tables in the Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corp., New Mexico, US) sheet. We used RevMan software to perform a meta-analysis and draw Forest plots. We used a random effects model to estimate risk ratios. A two-sided p-value of ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. A total of five randomized control trials (RCTs) with 5,838 patients were included in our analysis. The primary outcome was mortality at 28 days. Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit (ICU) and in-hospital mortality, mortality at 90 days and one year, reversal of shock, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay, incidence of superinfections, and incidence of limb and/or cerebral ischemia. The 28-day mortality was significantly reduced with hydrocortisone, 808 vs. 880 with placebo, Risk Ratio (RR)=0.92, confidence interval (CI) =0.85-0.99, p=0.04, I²=0%. There was no difference in ICU mortality (RR=0.93, CI=0.81-1.08), in-hospital mortality (RR=0.95, CI=0.84-1.08), 90-day mortality (RR=0.93, CI=0.84-1.02, p=0.10), and one-year mortality (RR=0.97, CI=0.84-1.12). Superinfections were significantly common with hydrocortisone, RR=1.16, CI=1.05-1.28, p=0.003. In conclusion, the use of hydrocortisone showed a significant reduction in mortality at 28 days and a trend toward reduced ICU mortality. This mortality reduction was observed at the cost of significantly higher superinfections.

Precision Immunotherapy for Sepsis

Decades of sepsis research into a specific immune system-targeting adjunctive therapy have not resulted in the discovery of an effective compound. Apart from antibiotics, source control, resuscitation and organ support, not a single adjunctive treatment is used in current clinical practice. The inability to determine the prevailing immunological phenotype of patients and the related large heterogeneity of study populations are regarded by many as the most important factors behind the disappointing results of past clinical trials. While the therapeutic focus has long been on immunosuppressive strategies, increased appreciation of the importance of sepsis-induced immunoparalysis in causing morbidity and mortality in sepsis patients has resulted in a paradigm shift in the sepsis research field towards strategies aimed at enhancing the immune response. However, similar to immunosuppressive therapies, precision medicine is imperative for future trials with immunostimulatory compounds to succeed. As such, identifying those patients with a severely suppressed or hyperactive immune system who will most likely benefit from either immunostimulatory or immunosuppressive therapy, and accurate monitoring of both the immune and treatment response is crucial. This review provides an overview of the challenges lying ahead on the path towards precision immunotherapy for patients suffering from sepsis.

Low-dose corticosteroids for adult patients with septic shock: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

PURPOSE

To assess the effect of low dose corticosteroids on outcomes in adults with septic shock.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing low-dose corticosteroids to placebo in adults with septic shock. Trial selection, data abstraction and risk of bias assessment were performed in duplicate. The primary outcome was short-term mortality. Secondary and tertiary outcomes included longer-term mortality, adverse events, quality of life, and duration of shock, mechanical ventilation and ICU stay.

RESULTS

There were 22 RCTs, including 7297 participants, providing data on short-term mortality. In two low risk of bias trials, the relative risk (RR) of short-term mortality with corticosteroid versus placebo was 0.98 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89-1.08, p = 0.71]. Sensitivity analysis including all trials was similar (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.91-1.02, p = 0.21) as was analysis of longer-term mortality (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.90-1.02, p = 0.18). In low risk of bias trials, the risk of experiencing any adverse event was higher with corticosteroids; however, there was substantial heterogeneity (RR 1.66; 95% CI 1.03-2.70, p = 0.04, I2 = 78%). No trials reported quality of life outcomes. Duration of shock [mean difference (MD) -1.52 days; 95% CI -1.71 to -1.32, p < 0.0001], duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -1.38 days; 95% CI -1.96 to -0.80, p < 0.0001), and ICU stay (MD -0.75 days; 95% CI -1.34 to -0.17, p = 0.01) were shorter with corticosteroids versus placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

In adults with septic shock treated with low dose corticosteroids, short- and longer-term mortality are unaffected, adverse events increase, but duration of shock, mechanical ventilation and ICU stay are reduced. PROSPERO registration no. CRD42017084037.

Effects of Hydrocortisone on Regulating Inflammation, Hemodynamic Stability, and Preventing Shock in Severe Sepsis Patients

Background

Severe sepsis is among the most common causes of death in Emergency Departments, with more than 30% mortality. Hydrocortisone is used in severe sepsis patients who were not responsive to fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy. However, the effect of hydrocortisone on regulating inflammation, hemodynamic stability, and preventing shock is still unclear in Chinese patients.

Material/Methods

In this prospective observational study, we included 105 severe sepsis patients. We measured the level of serum inflammatory cytokines, hemodynamic variables, and phagocytic ability of innate immune cells during the treatment. We analyzed the relationship between these variables and the hydrocortisone treatment.

Results

We treated 43 (41.0%) patients with hydrocortisone, while the other 62 (59.0%) patients were not, based on their response to fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy. The hydrocortisone group had a mean simplified acute physiology score (SAPS) II score of 41.8 with standard deviation (SD) of 7.1, while the non-hydrocortisone group had a mean SAPS II score of 36.7 with SD of 7.3. The mean sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores of these 2 groups were 10.6 and 9.2, respectively. We found an obvious decrease of serum pro-inflammatory cytokines, including interleukin-1β (IL-1β), interferon-γ (IFN-γ), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), and IL-6, after hydrocortisone treatment. However, these changes were not observed in the non-hydrocortisone group. What’s more, amelioration of hemodynamic variables was observed after hydrocortisone treatment. No significant association between hydrocortisone treatment and innate immune cell phagocytic function was observed.

Conclusions

Based on these results, we believe that hydrocortisone treatment has potential anti-inflammatory, hemodynamic reversal, and stability effects on severe sepsis patients. These key benefits may help patients by preventing septic shock.

Extracellular Vesicles as Markers and Mediators in Sepsis

Sepsis is defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. It remains a highly lethal condition in which current tools for early diagnosis and therapeutic decision-making are far from ideal. Extracellular vesicles (EVs), 30 nm to several micrometers in size, are released from cells upon activation and apoptosis and express membrane epitopes specific for their parental cells. Since their discovery two decades ago, their role as biomarkers and mediators in various diseases has been intensively studied. However, their potential importance in the sepsis syndrome has gained attention only recently. Sepsis and EVs are both complex fields in which standardization has long been overdue. In this review, several topics are discussed. First, we review current studies on EVs in septic patients with emphasis on their variable quality and clinical utility. Second, we discuss the diagnostic and therapeutic potential of EVs as well as their role as facilitators of cell communication via micro RNA and the relevance of micro-organism-derived EVs. Third, we give an overview over the potential beneficial but also detrimental roles of EVs in sepsis. Finally, we focus on the role of EVs in selected intensive care scenarios such as coagulopathy, mechanical ventilation and blood transfusion. Overall, the prospect for EV use in septic patients is bright, ranging from rapid and precise (point-of-care) diagnostics, prevention of harmful iatrogenic interventions, to using EVs as guides of individualized therapy. Before the above is achieved, however, the EV research field requires reliable standardization of the current methods and development of new analytical procedures that can close the existing technological gaps.

Stem Cell–based Therapies for Sepsis

Sepsis is a life-threatening syndrome resulting in shock and organ dysfunction stemming from a microbial infection. Sepsis has a mortality of 40% and is implicated in half of all in-hospital deaths. The host immune response to microbial infection is critical, with early-phase sepsis characterized by a hyperinflammatory immune response, whereas the later phase of sepsis is often complicated by suppression. Sepsis has no treatment, and management remains supportive.

Stem cells constitute exciting potential therapeutic agents for sepsis. In this review, we examine the rationale for stem cells in sepsis, focusing on mesenchymal stem/stromal cells, which currently demonstrate the greatest therapeutic promise. We examine the preclinical evidence base and evaluate potential mechanisms of action of these cells that are important in the setting of sepsis. We discuss early-phase clinical trials and critically appraise translational barriers to the use of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells in patients with sepsis.

High-dose dexamethasone induced LPS-stimulated rat alveolar macrophages apoptosis

Prolonged administration of an excessive dose of corticosteroids proved to be harmful for patients with acute lung injury (ALI). A previous study has found that repeated administration of an excessive dose of methylprednisolone reduced alveolar macrophages (AMs) in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) with an unknown mechanism. This study aimed to investigate the effect of excessive use of dexamethasone (Dex) on BALF AMs in vitro. Transmission electron microscopy and DNA fragmentation analysis demonstrated that 10^-4 and 10^-5 M Dex induced lipopolysaccharide-stimulated rat AMs apoptosis with downregulation of tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin (IL)-12 and upregulation of IL-10, transforming growth factor-β. These results indicated that apoptosis might be a novel contribution involved in the detrimental effect of excessive dose of Dex clinically used to treat ALI.

Purpura Fulminans: Mechanism and Management of Dysregulated Hemostasis

Purpura fulminans (PF) is a highly thrombotic subtype of disseminated intravascular coagulation that can accompany severe bacterial, and more rarely, viral infections. PF is associated with an extremely high mortality rate, and patients often die of overwhelming multisystemic thrombosis rather than septic shock. Survivors typically experience amputation of involved extremities and significant scarring in affected areas. Despite the devastating clinical course associated with this hemostatic complication of infection, the mechanism of PF remains poorly understood. Severe acquired deficiency of protein C and dysfunction of the protein C-thrombomodulin pathway as well as other systems that exert a negative regulatory effect on coagulation have been implicated. Management of PF involves treatment of the underlying infection, aggressive anticoagulation, and robust transfusion support aimed at correcting acquired deficiencies in natural anticoagulant proteins. In this review, we address the diagnosis and management of PF with a focus on a rational approach to this condition informed by the available data. Proposed mechanisms underlying the dysregulation of coagulation seen in PF are also covered, and implications for therapy are discussed.

Controversies in Corticosteroid use for Sepsis

BACKGROUND

Severe sepsis and septic shock are potentially deadly conditions managed in the emergency department (ED). Management centers on source control, fluid resuscitation, broad-spectrum antimicrobials, and vasopressors as needed. The use of corticosteroids is controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the evidence behind corticosteroid therapy in patients with septic shock.

DISCUSSION

Septic shock is associated with severe mortality and morbidity. Cytokine release produces a systemic inflammatory state. Vasopressor-resistant septic shock warrants consideration of the disease state and other pathologies such as adrenal insufficiency. Many studies and meta-analyses have been conducted evaluating corticosteroid therapy for this population. High-dose corticosteroid therapy is associated with increased harm, but physiologic-dose corticosteroids may decrease the need for vasopressors. Mortality benefit is controversial, with much of the literature demonstrating no effect. The risk of superinfection is not suggested by the majority of studies. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign advises consideration of corticosteroids in patients with vasopressor and fluid-resistant septic shock. Patients with vasopressor-resistant septic shock with no contraindications to corticosteroids may benefit from hydrocortisone 100 mg intravenously (i.v.) every 8 h or 50 mg i.v. every 6 h. Fludrocortisone is not recommended at this time.

CONCLUSIONS

Septic shock is associated with higher mortality, specifically for patients with vasopressor and fluid-refractory shock. The use of physiologic-dose steroids can reduce vasopressor requirements and improve time of shock resolution. Current literature suggests corticosteroids do not improve mortality, but further studies are required.

Sepsis and Septic Shock: Current Treatment Strategies and New Approaches

Sepsis is a complex condition characterized by the simultaneous activation of inflammation and coagulation in response to microbial insult. These events manifest as systemic inflammatory response syndrome or sepsis symptoms through the release of proinflammatory cytokines, procoagulants, and adhesion molecules from immune cells and/or damaged endothelium. Today, sepsis is a severe multisystem disease with difficult treatments for its manifestations and high mortality rates. In the last two decades in particular, many studies have been conducted on sepsis that cause shock, multiorgan dysfunction, and organ failure by especially leading to hemodynamic changes. In sepsis, increasing antibiotic resistance and medicine-resistant hemodynamic changes have resulted in further research on new treatment modalities in addition to classical treatments. In the last decade, the sepsis physiopathology has been elucidated. Various therapeutic agents have been used in addition to antibiotherapy, but no satisfactory results have been obtained. This review summarizes the sepsis pathophysiology, current treatment protocols, and new approaches.

Ulinastatin - a newer potential therapeutic option for multiple organ dysfunction syndrome

Despite significant improvements in medical and surgical management, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) or multiple organ failure following conditions such as acute pancreatitis, severe sepsis, and traumatic, hemorrhagic, and endotoxin shocks is still accompanied with a high mortality rate. In light of the crucial role of immunologic derangement recently conceptualized in these conditions, ulinastatin, a urinary trypsin inhibitor, is considered as a potentially beneficial immunomodulator drug for MODS. Mechanisms involving protections against tissue organs and endothelial cell and anti-inflammatory effects by ulinastatin are dependent on the inhibition of polymorphonuclear leukocyte (PMN)-derived elastase, tumor necrosis factor α, and other pro-inflammatory cytokines and interleukins (IL-1, IL-6, and IL-8). Ulinastatin also suppresses the activation of PMN cells, macrophages, and platelets. Derived from these properties, ulinastatin has been investigated as a potential clinical therapy for indications including shock and pancreatitis and approved in Japan and China with ongoing clinical trials around the globe. Off-label potential uses of ulinastatin have been reported in preterm labor and hematological, hepatic, renal, and cardiovascular diseases including vasculitis syndromes such as Kawasaki disease.

The Management of Sepsis: A Practical Review

The incidence of the sepsis syndrome has increased dramatically in the last few decades. During this time we have gained new insights into the pathophysiologic mechanisms leading to organ dysfunction in sepsis and the importance of the host-bacterial interactions in mediating many of these processes. This knowledge has led to new therapeutic approaches and the investigation of a number of novel agents. An assessment of these approaches is presented to aid clinicians in the management of patients with severe sepsis. Criteria used to select studies included their relevance to the management of sepsis and their pertinence to clinicians. Appropriate antibiotic selection and volume resuscitation remain the cornerstone of treatment of septic patients. Hydroxyethyl starch solutions have theoretical advantages over crystalloids; there is, however, no data that the type of resuscitation fluid alters outcome. Vasoactive agents are required in patients who remain hemodynamically unstable or have evidence of tissue hypoxia after adequate volume resuscitation. Although dopamine is widely used, dobutamine and norepinephrine are our vasoactive agents of choice. Dopamine has no proven role in oliguric patients, with early dialysis recommended in patients with acute renal failure. The preferred method of renal replacement therapy remains to be determined. Blood products should be used cautiously in patients with disseminated intravascular coagulation. Therapeutic strategies that interfere with the immune system have not been proven to improve the outcome in unselected groups of patients. However, immunomodulation may prove to have a role in select subgroups of patients. Antibiotic therapy and intensive physiological support continues to be the main approach to the management of patients with severe sepsis. Despite the development of numerous novel therapeutic agents, these drugs have not been demonstrated to improve patient outcome.

Clinically-oriented therapies in sepsis: a review

Our insight of the sepsis response has evolved to encompass not only the pro-inflammatory but also an anti-inflammatory reaction following infection. Clinical trials have been designed to target either bacterial products, endotoxin in particular, or mediators involved in the sepsis response, but until recently the majority of them have given unfavorable results. In this article, we provide a scope of clinical trials that have been done in immunomodulation during sepsis whether or not they provide positive results. We will also discuss some of the reasons why those studies have been disappointing. Current and future trials with a better assessment of inflammatory status of patients and better-defined outcomes such as organ dysfunction are now underway.

Replacement therapy with hydrocortisone in catecholamine-dependent septic shock

Septic shock is one of the leading causes of death in intensive care units world-wide. Scientists have made great improvements in understanding mechanisms of inflammation, and the sequence of activation of the various pro- and anti-inflammatory markers is now well known. In contrast, physicians have failed to improve survival from septic shock despite the development of specific targets at various points in the cytokine cascade considered to have a key role in host survival in sepsis. Corticosteroids were among the first anti-inflammatory drugs to be tested in large randomized controlled trials. These trials showed that patients with septic shock did not benefit from a short course of large doses of steroids. More recent findings highlighting the role of the integrity of the hypothalamic—pituitary—adrenal axis to respond appropriately to a septic insult, have led to a re-appraisal of the use of steroids in septic shock. Several randomized controlled trials have evaluated the efficacy of a replacement therapy with hydrocortisone in severe sepsis. These trials strongly suggest that this replacement therapy reduces the morbidity of septic shock and may favorably affect survival from septic shock.

Immunotherapy of Sepsis: Blind Alley or Call for Personalized Assessment?

Sepsis is the most frequent cause of death in noncoronary intensive care units. In the past 10 years, progress has been made in the early identification of septic patients and their treatment. These improvements in support and therapy mean that mortality is gradually decreasing, however, the rate of death from sepsis remains unacceptably high. Immunotherapy is not currently part of the routine treatment of sepsis. Despite experimental successes, the administration of agents to block the effect of sepsis mediators failed to show evidence for improved outcome in a multitude of clinical trials. The following survey summarizes the current knowledge and results of clinical trials on the immunotherapy of sepsis and describes the limitations of our knowledge of the pathogenesis of sepsis. Administration of immunomodulatory drugs should be linked to the current immune status assessed by both clinical and molecular patterns. Thus, a careful daily review of the patient's immune status needs to be introduced into routine clinical practice giving the opportunity for effective and tailored use of immunomodulatory therapy.

Steroids and Sepsis: Time for Another Reevaluation

Treatment of sepsis has changed little in the past few decades and the lack of improvement is reflected in the relatively steady mortality rate. Much of the initial disappointment surrounding many of the past multicentered clinical trials in sepsis centers on the use of short-term, high-dose steroids. While recent advances focusing on the interplay between inflammation and coagulation are expected to result in important new treatments in sepsis, rekindled enthusiasm for the role of supraphysiologic-dose steroids is adding to the excitement. Specifically, emerging evidence suggests that moderate-dose glucocorticoids may improve outcomes in septic shock patients, in part, by treating occult adrenal insufficiency. One preliminary study that has sparked considerable interest reported a 30% relative reduction in mortality in sepsis patients treated with modest doses of hydrocortisone for 1 week. It appears clear the role of adrenal insufficiency and steroids in septic shock is deserving of a reevaluation.

The role of steroids following major trauma

This article reviews the indications and evidence for the administration of steroids to patients who have suffered significant trauma. Uncontroversial indications are rare. In spinal cord injury steroids are often given but the practical benefits are questionable. The case for treatment in head injury is unproven. Consideration should be given to treating all those patients who develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), although treatment should be deferred to the later (fibroproliferative) stages. The role of steroids in sepsis is complicated and, although steroid administration can have dramatic effects on vasopressor requirements, convincing evidence for mortality reduction is not available.

Endothelial and Microcirculatory Function and Dysfunction in Sepsis

The microcirculation is a series of arterioles, capillaries, and venules that performs essential functions of oxygen and nutrient delivery, customized to the unique physiologic needs of the supplied organ. The homeostatic microcirculatory response to infection can become harmful if overactive and/or dysregulated. Pathologic microcirculatory dysfunction can be directly visualized by intravital microscopy or indirectly measured via detection of circulating biomarkers. Although several treatments have been shown to protect the microcirculation during sepsis, they have not improved patient outcomes when applied indiscriminately. Future outcomes-oriented studies are needed to test sepsis therapeutics when personalized to a patient's microcirculatory dysfunction.

In Search of a Cure for Sepsis: Taming the Monster in Critical Care Medicine

In spite of over half a century of research, sepsis still constitutes a major problem in health care delivery. Although advances in research have significantly increased our knowledge of the pathogenesis of sepsis and resulted in better prognosis and improved survival outcome, sepsis still remains a major challenge in modern medicine with an increase in occurrence predicted and a huge socioeconomic burden. It is generally accepted that sepsis is due to an initial hyperinflammatory response. However, numerous efforts aimed at targeting the proinflammatory cytokine network have been largely unsuccessful and the search for novel potential therapeutic targets continues. Recent studies provide compelling evidence that dysregulated anti-inflammatory responses may also contribute to sepsis mortality. Our previous studies on the role of regulatory T cells and phosphoinositide 3-kinases in sepsis highlight immunological approaches that could be explored for sepsis therapy. In this article, we review the current and emerging concepts in sepsis, highlight novel potential therapeutic targets and immunological approaches for sepsis treatment and propose a biphasic treatment approach for management of the condition.